EX1 versus EX3, why or why not?
- Thread starter falves1
- Start date
Yeah, there is the lcd that you can now use outdoors, which was pretty useless before, the curved back that you can now use on your shoulder, dial for choosing frames and the optional mount on the back for the hard drive. I would say it's worth it just for the removable lenses, but ergonomically it's much improved - for the most part.
gabrielflorit
Well-known member
The EX1 works fine outdoors with the $19.95 Hoodman 400. But I'm sure the EX3's LCD is an improvement nonetheless.
MattDavis
Well-known member
Pimp your camera!
Pimp your camera!
I shoot the same kind of stuff with my EX1. Corporate interviews.
As much as I hate to say this, the EX-3 may be a better choice if you can afford it, because whilst the image may be identical, the EX-3 will have 'presence'. Pimp it up with matte box, unnecessary stick mic with dead cat, heavy-set tripod. In corporates, it's what they want.
I am flabbergasted that in this day and age, we still have to pimp cameras for corporate shoots. The EX-1 will deliver jaw-dropping expensive images, and the EX-3 will do the same - no better, no worse. But the EX-3 will get the better response from 'The Suits'. They will deliver better responses, take you more seriously, do more one-takers, and generally be happier. An EX-1 will do just as well, but the fresh meat will do more for an EX-3.
I hate this fact (as an EX-1 owner). But that's how it goes.
The EX-1 is a fantastic candid camera, it's invisible, you get moments that a shoulder-mounted camera could never get, and I love it to bits. But I buy a big French Flagged Matte Box not to protect my lens, but to put lipstick and eye-liner on my EX-1.
I now know that the EX-3 looks like a modern cut-down DSR-570. Yes, the 570 is probably the better camera for SD thanks to bigger chips and better glass, but if you're shooting talking heads, it's a third of the cost of a tricked out 570 and the images look pretty good.
You're up against big bruiser macho cameras that deliver lesser images than the EX line. The EX-1 is an Ugly Betty, the EX-3 is an Agent Starling. Even the analogy gets me red mist.
My clients seem to be settled on "EX1 shoots professionally whilst not looking too expensive" whilst I bet if I did an EX3 shoot the 'expensive' poke would disappear, and for my clients, I'd lose out to DSR-570 teams. Hmmm. I'll stick with EX-1, others can/should go EX3.
Discuss?
PS: Invest in SxS cards. I mean it. You need 4 x 16 GB. I LOVE this workflow, but you really need to shoot with gay abandon all day, then on-line to hard disk each evening. You DO NOT want to be finding your laptop during the day. I would spend more on SxS cards with the EX-1 rather than get an EX-3 if my budget was tight.
PPS: I own an 8 and a 16. I rent 1-2 16s on event jobs, and will buy 2x 16s when the price moves. No kidding. Get more SxS than you think you'll need.
PPPS: At any point, should you think it's not worth it, look at good EX1 footage. It's all worth it. All my clients have noticed it. My day rate has increased for it. But right now, I'm working out if my Second Camera should be an EX-1 or EX-3. However good my footage looks, it's how the talent performs. Sometimes they need to be in front of a big pimped camera. So right now (at my price bracket) I'd go for an EX-3 over a DSR-570 whilst agonising over an F-355. I'd shove a Matte Box in front of an EX-3 quite frankly.
Pimp your camera!
I shoot the same kind of stuff with my EX1. Corporate interviews.
As much as I hate to say this, the EX-3 may be a better choice if you can afford it, because whilst the image may be identical, the EX-3 will have 'presence'. Pimp it up with matte box, unnecessary stick mic with dead cat, heavy-set tripod. In corporates, it's what they want.
I am flabbergasted that in this day and age, we still have to pimp cameras for corporate shoots. The EX-1 will deliver jaw-dropping expensive images, and the EX-3 will do the same - no better, no worse. But the EX-3 will get the better response from 'The Suits'. They will deliver better responses, take you more seriously, do more one-takers, and generally be happier. An EX-1 will do just as well, but the fresh meat will do more for an EX-3.
I hate this fact (as an EX-1 owner). But that's how it goes.
The EX-1 is a fantastic candid camera, it's invisible, you get moments that a shoulder-mounted camera could never get, and I love it to bits. But I buy a big French Flagged Matte Box not to protect my lens, but to put lipstick and eye-liner on my EX-1.
I now know that the EX-3 looks like a modern cut-down DSR-570. Yes, the 570 is probably the better camera for SD thanks to bigger chips and better glass, but if you're shooting talking heads, it's a third of the cost of a tricked out 570 and the images look pretty good.
You're up against big bruiser macho cameras that deliver lesser images than the EX line. The EX-1 is an Ugly Betty, the EX-3 is an Agent Starling. Even the analogy gets me red mist.
My clients seem to be settled on "EX1 shoots professionally whilst not looking too expensive" whilst I bet if I did an EX3 shoot the 'expensive' poke would disappear, and for my clients, I'd lose out to DSR-570 teams. Hmmm. I'll stick with EX-1, others can/should go EX3.
Discuss?
PS: Invest in SxS cards. I mean it. You need 4 x 16 GB. I LOVE this workflow, but you really need to shoot with gay abandon all day, then on-line to hard disk each evening. You DO NOT want to be finding your laptop during the day. I would spend more on SxS cards with the EX-1 rather than get an EX-3 if my budget was tight.
PPS: I own an 8 and a 16. I rent 1-2 16s on event jobs, and will buy 2x 16s when the price moves. No kidding. Get more SxS than you think you'll need.
PPPS: At any point, should you think it's not worth it, look at good EX1 footage. It's all worth it. All my clients have noticed it. My day rate has increased for it. But right now, I'm working out if my Second Camera should be an EX-1 or EX-3. However good my footage looks, it's how the talent performs. Sometimes they need to be in front of a big pimped camera. So right now (at my price bracket) I'd go for an EX-3 over a DSR-570 whilst agonising over an F-355. I'd shove a Matte Box in front of an EX-3 quite frankly.
MattDavis
Well-known member
For corporate interviews, a cheap one!
I mostly film corporate events, so a nude EX1 is ideal because it's almost invisible. It's only when I film interviews with power-suits that I feel I want to hide my EX1 behind a matte box.
Yes.
I have an EX-1 so I'm working with its fixed lens. And I have no complaints. The speed at which I have to work, even a 35mm adaptor like the Letus (which is very desirable) would get in the way in my line of work.
To be clear about this: I have 2x Z1s, a PDX10 and a HV20 in addition to my EX1.
I am seriously considering cashing in my 2 Z1s and putting the money towards an EX-3 when a good Wide Angle lens comes out as I'm totally sold on the EX workflow for Standard Definition (film in 720p25 for progressive or 720p50 for interlace).
But I'd still say budget for twice the amount of SxS cards that you think you need up front, and I'd have more SxS and an EX-1rather than a couple of cards and an EX-3. You can rent cards (I do at the moment), but after a while it really bugs you not having them available at the drop of a hat.
ddh
Well-known member
I have found that a matte box on the front of any small camera (my dvx 100 for example) pumps it up to being taken as a serious camera! Corporate suits do have a thing for big (had to pull out the Beta SP on more than one occasion) but they also have a thing for what passes as a movie camera!
A good matte box does the trick every time!
A good matte box does the trick every time!
jls4
Veteran
Hey Matt,
PM me when you get ready to sell one of your Z1us. I'm thinking of getting a Ex1, but I want a 1080i CCD Camera as a backup in case I need "fast moving shots". I primarily do movies, so 2 cameras - one for static slow moving shots and another for fast moving, flickering shots would be ideal.
Let me know what your sell price is and how many hours you have on the heads. Thanks
PM me when you get ready to sell one of your Z1us. I'm thinking of getting a Ex1, but I want a 1080i CCD Camera as a backup in case I need "fast moving shots". I primarily do movies, so 2 cameras - one for static slow moving shots and another for fast moving, flickering shots would be ideal.
Let me know what your sell price is and how many hours you have on the heads. Thanks
As far as I know (and it could be wrong) there is really no major improvement to the EX3 over the EX1. The resolution is the still the same. The LCD resolution is also the same. EX3 still uses CMOS and rolling shutter. And as many mentioned above, the only major change is the look and feel of the camera (aesthetics) plus the capability of having a hard drive hookup to the camera. However, here's what I'm wondering. If I'm using some kind of a support kit, I don't see how can't add the hard drive to the system.
For me, it's hard to justify paying over $2,000 just for the look and feel of a camera unless my business has to do with having a nice/cool looking camera.
For me, it's hard to justify paying over $2,000 just for the look and feel of a camera unless my business has to do with having a nice/cool looking camera.
DavidChia
Well-known member
Or even with a mattebox, a shoulder support and a follow focus unit from Redrock, it works out cheaper then the EX3 and it looks more pimp up ... So even if your business has to do with a nice looking camera, the EX3 is still not an option.
Only if you want the option to change HD lens that will cost a few thousand more, then maybe this is the better deal for you...
Last edited:
Barry_Green
Moderator
The look and feel isn't that much different though; it's the same basic form factor. It's not like a traditional shoulder mount camera, it's really the same thing as the EX1 but with a pad on the back so you can but it up against your shoulder, and a tube on the LCD. The $2,000 price difference for the EX3 is mostly in the ability to remove and interchange the lens...
LuckyStudio 13
The Tapeless One
I am more into the TC IN/OUT and GEN LOCK
Back in the day a lot of people opted for the XL1, because it had interchangeable lenses. How many people actually put a different lens on there is another story altogether. I cant remember seeing any.
FWIW.
FWIW.
PerroneFord
Deals in Lead
Well, the EX3 also makes it a LOT easier to shoot multicam or lock to external timecode.
DXMetal beat me to it.
DXMetal beat me to it.
The reason I would prefer the EX-3 over the EX-1 is the real image out, not just a monitor connection, TC in/out, interchangable lenses. I have a job where I need really long lenses so pulling the normal lens off and making an adapter to mount a Nikon 400-600 tele lens to shoot mountain goats and other wild life is important. Also the ergonomics look so much better than the EX-1 so it will be much easier for those long days shooting verite documentaries. I personally don't like the EX-1 viewfinder way to few pixels, the EX-3 is soooooooo much nicer and sharper.
Just a few of my thoughts.
Just a few of my thoughts.
HVXSHROPSHIRE
Member
the interchangeable lenses for the ex3 is so expensive. Sure its cool to be able to put a 10k piece of glass infront of your ex3 but wow, in less you have the budget to do so how economical is it to do so?
Mark Bolding
Member
I think a real advantage is going to be the remote connection for paintbox, depending on what it becomes available. On a jib or a multicam shoot that will really set this camera apart.
I have been reviewing and writing about EX-1 and should have an EX-3 next week.
One of my personal concerns about the EX-1 (as I've probably written in other threads) is its ergonomics. It handles poorly for someone with small arms and wrists like me. I have seen larger-boned shooters handle it much more deftly, but without some sort of support, hand-held is impossible for me. I do not like the position of the controls and the on-off switch is tacky. The EX-3 makes a slight improvement to the on-off switch with its slightly deeper indentation, but it still is not worthy of a pro camera. EX-3 handles much better and the controls which illogically had been on the back of the EX-1 are now more accessible on the side. The shoulder mount and position of the hand grip on the lens now makes hand-held plausible (although I will still always use some form of support-- whether my efficient but dorky-looking TurtileRig or the DV Rig Junior).
To me, the handling and ergonomics of the camera are worth $2K. Only you can determine if it is worth it to you.
There will indeed be people with the budget to put a $10K piece of glass in front of the EX-3. I can easily see shooters with XDCAM HD adding an EX-3 as a B cam and perhaps using one of their lenses on the EX-3.
One of my personal concerns about the EX-1 (as I've probably written in other threads) is its ergonomics. It handles poorly for someone with small arms and wrists like me. I have seen larger-boned shooters handle it much more deftly, but without some sort of support, hand-held is impossible for me. I do not like the position of the controls and the on-off switch is tacky. The EX-3 makes a slight improvement to the on-off switch with its slightly deeper indentation, but it still is not worthy of a pro camera. EX-3 handles much better and the controls which illogically had been on the back of the EX-1 are now more accessible on the side. The shoulder mount and position of the hand grip on the lens now makes hand-held plausible (although I will still always use some form of support-- whether my efficient but dorky-looking TurtileRig or the DV Rig Junior).
To me, the handling and ergonomics of the camera are worth $2K. Only you can determine if it is worth it to you.
There will indeed be people with the budget to put a $10K piece of glass in front of the EX-3. I can easily see shooters with XDCAM HD adding an EX-3 as a B cam and perhaps using one of their lenses on the EX-3.